GTHA Transit Fare Integration

[Northern Light]

I think its worth saying, irrespective of the merits of different structures, that a pure fare by distance model, and/or one that applies a premium to subway rides is a political non-starter at this time, absent substantial new subsidies.

I think Metrolinx is being politically obtuse if they are serious about this option.

It will be vetoed faster than road tolls.

That's not a comment on merit, but on whether provincial politicians value their re-election.

****

To me, given the political realities, as well as the fiscal ones, I would argue for a modified status quo.

Phase in charging for parking for GO, but off-set this with lower GO fares, with a disproportionate reduction for short-haul trips.

In order not to produce rebellion among the suburban commuter class, the price reduction would have to precede any slowly phased in parking charge, and this would
be funded by a modest provincial subsidy to GO that would be phased back out (or diverted to higher service levels.

Second, I would suggest a zone system; but with the zones being the existing major transit systems with the exception of Brampton/Miss, which I would combine as one zone.

Third, harmonize the existing local system fares, roughly at the average of the current fare structures (no radical change).

Fourth, make a GO co-fare universal, partially cover the cost by raising existing co-fares from around .75c to $1.25; the rest has to be covered by new subsidy.

Finally, deal with short-haul trips that cross zone borders by one of three options.

a) A model that makes all cross-zone trips a co-fare (ie. add $1.25 each time you cross zone)
b) A model that identifies a select number of routes where no added fare should be charged that would meet the needs of the majority of cross-border trips (ie DRT to UTSC, or Miss/Brampton to Humber College North etc. etc.
c) A model that caps your total monthly expenditure regardless of what trips you take. (like a Metropass, but covering a wider area, at a higher price point)

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

The Province/Metrolinx could easily have solved the problem of 905-416 cross-boundary travel by covering the co-fare differential (easy to do now with Presto). It chose not to.

AoD

 

[amnesiajune]

Is New York not set up the same way we are? Flat rate across all boroughs, premium fare for express buses, fare by distance for commuter trains, and separate fare for separate systems outside the city (though they appear to honour each other's transfers, including NYCT buses).

Yes and no - New York City does have a flat fare system, but it spans a larger area - roughly the same as if the TTC were expanded west to Hurontario and north to 16th Avenue/Rutherford. And since you brought up NYC, they're also experimenting with fare integration.

 

[salsa]

However it's well know that Metrolinx prefers fare by distance.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Shh. Don't tell PRESTO, but they showed me that I "transferred" at Runnymede Station, when I should have started a new trip. It was an hour after I started my first trip to the Jane Station, but did not enter the station downstairs itself.

The bad news (if it were fare-by-distance), that first trip showed that I started 5 km from where I actually started. In addition, instead of showing that I "transferred" to a bus at Jane Station, it showed that I "transferred" 10 km away onto a bus.

 

[nfitz]

Shh. Don't tell PRESTO, but they showed me that I "transferred" at Runnymede Station, when I should have started a new trip. It was an hour after I started my first trip.

Presto knows this happens. They've even started to accept it on Twitter:

Here's an interesting exchange from today:

 

[ssiguy2]

Unless huge subsidies are in place, subways and RER will most likely be more expensive than bus or streetcar if going to the same place.

All transit systems in the province will see their subsidies increase significantly in 2019 & 2021 as they get a bigger share of the gas tax from QP.

That would be a great way to bring subway/RT expansion to a halt. Low income people will justifiably be mad that subway expansion which they may not be able to afford goes ahead resulting in less bus/streetcar service that they can afford. Subway ridership will fall while bus/streetcar ridership soars and they will be unable to effectively provide a decent service and will result in even more "bunching" than you have now.

Paying by technology is also an incredible waste of funding because it encourages people to take a longer and slower trip. For example, someone going to Rouge Park from downtown.................either they can take just one RER train ride or they have to take a subway trip to Bloor, another subway to Kennedy, and probably take 2 more buses to reach the same destination. It's an incredible waste of infrastructure and cost infinitely more and places capacity restraints as those long-distance travellers have to cram on to the same trains/buses that are serving more local/medium distance travellers.

Whether taking streetcar, bus, BRT, LRT, streetcar, streetcar ROW, RT, subway, RER, or horse n buggy shouldn't make a hoot of distance, the fare from A to B should be the same. It makes for a faster trip and is a far superior use of infrastructure, rolling stock, and labour.

 

[Leo_Chan]

All transit systems in the province will see their subsidies increase significantly in 2019 & 2021 as they get a bigger share of the gas tax from QP.

That would be a great way to bring subway/RT expansion to a halt. Low income people will justifiably be mad that subway expansion which they may not be able to afford goes ahead resulting in less bus/streetcar service that they can afford. Subway ridership will fall while bus/streetcar ridership soars and they will be unable to effectively provide a decent service and will result in even more "bunching" than you have now.

Paying by technology is also an incredible waste of funding because it encourages people to take a longer and slower trip. For example, someone going to Rouge Park from downtown.................either they can take just one RER train ride or they have to take a subway trip to Bloor, another subway to Kennedy, and probably take 2 more buses to reach the same destination. It's an incredible waste of infrastructure and cost infinitely more and places capacity restraints as those long-distance travellers have to cram on to the same trains/buses that are serving more local/medium distance travellers.

Whether taking streetcar, bus, BRT, LRT, streetcar, streetcar ROW, RT, subway, RER, or horse n buggy shouldn't make a hoot of distance, the fare from A to B should be the same. It makes for a faster trip and is a far superior use of infrastructure, rolling stock, and labour.

I understand that a direct RER trip should cost about the same as a long subway + bus ride, but what if the two modes were in the same corridor. Such as a subway line that has a bus (or streetcar) route directly above it. Would the subway cost more than the bus starting and going to the same place? Of course this only happens if there is a parallel bus route.

 

[Palma]

View attachment 99129

However it's well know that Metrolinx prefers fare by distance.

its about tmme

 

[amnesiajune]

I understand that a direct RER trip should cost about the same as a long subway + bus ride, but what if the two modes were in the same corridor. Such as a subway line that has a bus (or streetcar) route directly above it. Would the subway cost more than the bus starting and going to the same place? Of course this only happens if there is a parallel bus route.

It's getting frustrating watching Metrolinx overcomplicate this. They should do something like what the city does - decide the fundamental principles behind what a project should do, propose a few options and then evaluate them against those principles. If it were up to me, it would just be this:

1. There should be a universal flat fare for travel within one municipality
2. The cost of travelling across a municipal boundary on any transit system except Go Transit should be capped at one dollar
3. No tapping off of a surface vehicle. Tap-offs only allowed for RER and subways.

Then Metrolinx either negotiates with the cities to sort out the new system, or just imposes it (which is fully within Metrolinx's power).

 

[TOareaFan]

I don't live in Toronto....and the the TTC is likely only the 3rd most used transit system in my life.....but I think it would be an absolute disaster to force a fare by distance fare structure on the entire TTC. I get the impression anyone suggesting such a system for TTC is visualizing subway stations in their head and thinking "well they have to pass through a gate anyway, so what's the harm of having them tap on their way through"....and for the subway that might be true and might only create a minor inconvenience.

On surface transit (particularly streetcars) fare by distance will have catastrophic impact on system operation. In my mind I am picturing every King car permanently stopped at intersections.....eg..wb streetcar stops at Universtiy.....waits there for one light cycle as the people getting off dutifully tap their presto cards on the way through......then watches another light cycle going by as the lineup of people waiting to get on can get on....it may, in rush hours, never actually get to the point where there are no people getting on or off and be facing a green light.

Obviously I am exercising some hyperbole here.....but what is the point of looking at ways to smooth the ride of the streetcar along King if we are just going to bugger it up again by forcing tap offs

 

[TOareaFan]

It's getting frustrating watching Metrolinx overcomplicate this. They should do something like what the city does - decide the fundamental principles behind what a project should do, propose a few options and then evaluate them against those principles. If it were up to me, it would just be this:

1. There should be a universal flat fare for travel within one municipality
2. The cost of travelling across a municipal boundary on any transit system except Go Transit should be capped at one dollar
3. No tapping off of a surface vehicle. Tap-offs only allowed for RER and subways.

Then Metrolinx either negotiates with the cities to sort out the new system, or just imposes it (which is fully within Metrolinx's power).

So status quo with a minor change (your number 2) to soften the blow of transfering from, for example, Miway to TTC.

 

[Kitsune]

They need to fix Presto if they want to do fare by distance. I've boarded the 64 at Queen / Wineva only for to show up as Unknown, Dufferin / Birchmount, Exhibition Loop etc. Seems only 50% of the time it can read it correctly as the other 50% it is wildly off.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

So status quo with a minor change (your number 2) to soften the blow of transfering from, for example, Miway to TTC.

The best solution is clear - the issue is more or less Metrolinx's insistence that the whole exercise be revenue neutral to them. They (i.e. the province) could easily have swallowed that differential but chose not to - and if a regional transit body can't lead by example, why should anyone else follow?

AoD

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

They need to fix Presto if they want to do fare by distance. I've boarded the 64 at Queen / Wineva only for to show up as Unknown, Dufferin / Birchmount, Exhibition Loop etc. Seems only 50% of the time it can read it correctly as the other 50% it is wildly off.

I think that's more of an issue with the reader not getting the correct GPS for the area it's in. It happens with Next buss as well as getting a fix on a vehicle consistently isn't as easy as people think it is.